Free Republic

Your description of the AC is near acurate.

Have you ever checked out The Antichrist and a Cup of Tea ?If not, type it into your search engine and let me know what you think.

I would like to know how many voted and what pecentage of those were in America.

Can anyone find out?

I totally agree. And what we are up against, as the article states, is the fact that the majority of those who voted for the beheadings are HERE IN AMERICA.

I was attempting to emphasize the fact that most of the people who voted via internet for the beheadings were Arabs and Muslims IN AMERICA.

I know the Arabs hate us but the most disturbing portions of the article, after reading all of it, were these:

Al Qassem hosted an Egyptian guest who over an entire hour was allowed to advocate, with sickening insistence, the beheading of hostages in Iraq as a legitimate act of resistance to what he called "these American dogs," regardless of whether the captives -- who are of many different nationalities -- are military personnel, civilians, aid workers, or spies.

What's worse is that in an electronic voting on the issue, a huge majority of Al Jazeera's viewers encouraged decapitation while less than 10 percent voted against.

The calamity is that most of those who voted for it were Arabs and Muslims living in the West with free access to the Internet, enjoying the full freedom of Western democracies.

Arabs and Muslims living in the West.

Thanks for finding the article.

Edmonton, Alberta, Apr. 3, 2002 Between 1990 and 1994, the average number of Canadian murder cases in which parents killed their children was 34 each year, according to University of Alberta psychology professor Dick Sobsey.

Between 1994 and 1998, the average rate of such deaths was 49, with 62 cases in 1997 alone.

Why the increase in what Sobsey calls "altruistic filicide", the killing of a child out of a belief that death is in the child's best interest?

I'm not saying to cast it aside for its original meaning I'm saying if you are going to use these verses to justify children going into heaven then using the same analogy you would be saying that Moses did not go to heaven.
You can't have it both ways.

I'm not saying to cast it aside for its original meaning I'm saying if you are going to use these verses to justify children going into heaven then using the same analogy you would be saying that Moses did not go to heaven.
You can't have it both ways.

Sorry Dave it was meant for JohnnyM

So, what do we do with those people who are using the age of accoutability defense for their barbaric killig of little children? It's happening all over the world.
Especially when there is no scriptural proof for an age of accoutability.
Be careful how you defend this lie.
And as I first posted, I know we aren't supposed to murder people, and I couldn't, but there are people out there that are. And they are basing it on their belief that they are sending their child or children to heaven.

Deuteronomy 1

1. These be the words which Moses spake unto all Israel on this side Jordan in the wilderness, in the plain over against the Red sea, between Paran, and Tophel, and Laban, and Hazeroth, and Dizahab.
37. Also the Lord was angry with me for your sakes, saying, Thou also shalt not go in thither.
38. But Joshua the son of Nun, which standeth before thee, he shall go in thither: encourage him: for he shall cause Israel to inherit it.
39. Moreover your little ones, which ye said should be a prey, and your children, which in that day had no knowledge between good and evil, they shall go in thither, and unto them will I give it, and they shall possess it.

As far as Deut.1:38-39 goes, as you can see here in v. 37, The Lord has just told Moses that he would not go to the promised land. That being a fact of scripture, then to use the same reasoning, this would mean that Moses didn't go to heaven if you dare to say that this means the children went to heaven. Knowing that Moses did go to heaven, Deut. 1:39 is pitched out the window in the analogy as you,re attempting to use it.

17. But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.

God used this phrase in Genesis to define a curse.
In 2 Samuel,

14. Howbeit, because by this deed thou hast given great occasion to the enemies of the Lord to blaspheme, the child also that is born unto thee shall surely die.
18. And it came to pass on the seventh day, that the child died.
23. But now he is dead, wherefore should I fast? can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me.

Why jump to the conclusion that, "I shall go to him, but he shall not return to me." is concerning heaven? I go to my mother's grave to visit and talk. I know her soul is not there, but in the same way Jesus and others who were visited after there burial, I could go to my mother but she could not return to me.

Please don't try to make a child threatening doctrine on verses someone else uses for their own comfort.

I would have to answer your question with two questions.
As quickly as your response was, have you considered the question I posted with depth and What do you think happened to these little children that the prophet Elisha cursed?

2 Kings 2:22-24

22. So the waters were healed unto this day, according to the saying of Elisha which he spake.
23. And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
24. And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the Lord. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them.

This is to ALL.

I think I can clear up all this confusion.

I've studied on this subject intensely for several years and there is one question I have for those who believe in an age of accountability.
The question is barbaric to say the least, but essential to the debate, though I would never do such a thing because I don't believe in an age of accountability.

The question:

If you truly in your heart of hearts believe in an age of accoutability, and that a child will without a doubt go to heaven if they die before they reach that age, why would you let any child reach that age?

Before you proceed with any more responses please consider your answer with the cause and affect that may lie ahead.

I know the first answers many will give such as well, the commandments say thou shalt not kill and that that could condemn you to hell, and to that I would say, the scriptures say that the greatest thing one can do is to give his own life for another.

There are many people who are barbarically killing little children and saying that the reason they did it was because they knew they would go to heaven and they didn't want them to have to grow up in this terrible world.

I say that the eople who started this age of accountability garbage and those who continue to spread it are much to blame for the deaths of these little ones.

I'll pray that you all will give up your preconceived notions of such an age of accountability and come to the knowledge of scriptural truth as in Mark 10:15 "Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, he shall not enter therein."

With this verse I think the Lord is saying come to me as with the mind of a child, eager to learn without years of traditions and lies that have filled up your heads.

This is the billboard in question. You need only to use something like Paint Shop Pro to enhance the image(lighten) and watch the female figure appear. The explicit points are blurred but you'll get the picture. I knew that the billboard wouldn't show any details but like you I thought this was not the billboard in question. What really surprised me was that there was only ONE complaint. Let a billboard like that go up near my hometown here in Tennessee and see what happens. The ducks... they flew right in front of the billboard as we shot, officer!

A flight attendant asked them to move back away from the front of the cabin. Atta screamed, “Allahu Akbar!”

Mohammed had always started every jihad battle with the cry of “Allahu Akbar.” God is great. It had struck fear into the hearts of the unbelievers for 1400 years.

This is from a writer who describes what happened during Mohammed Atta's takeover of the Boeing 767 (taken from the flight recorder) that he flew into one of the World Trade Center towers. The scream, “Allahu Akbar!” , is also what was screamed by the terrorist who removed Berg's head from his body. Isn't it interesting that when the seargent converted to Islam he chose a portion of the chant for his name?